Can someone explain the law to me

Status
Not open for further replies.
I find it very hard to believe that the MK police have suddenly decided to throw pace out of the window and started detaining people without arrest or charge.
Click to expand...

So do I, hence my question.
In order for that to happen, it would take a lot of people to suddenly decide to chuck the book out the window, and risk their jobs. In this day and age, unlikely.
As for the deletion? The OP says he wasn't forced to, he felt pressured too, and thats a subjective state of mind.
Personally, before leaping aboard the outrage bus, which is the default position for some, I'd want to know a whole lot more.
So, as the OP has the stop slip, and that as I recall has a box for arrest yes/no, perhaps he'd like to paste a scan on here, with the personal info blanked out, obviously. Maybe then we will get a bit more towards the bottom of it.
 
This looks like a shocking over-reaction by the police. They are getting a lot of bad press for much more minor transgressions than this.

It looks to me that if you wanted to (and that is important) you could take this a long way up the police complaints procedure. But you will need more than advice, you would need solicitors to act on your behalf. I'm sure it would be very intimidating taking on the police and it could also be a long-drawn out process. But you have been treated in an appalling way for no reason whatsoever.

Amateur Photographer is very hot on this kind of thing. It may be worthwhile contacting them, and your story could be taken up by the national press.

There may also be photographers organisations who would be willing to help. Send me a pm if you'd like me to ask around for you.
 
I find this whole scenario incredibly difficult to believe.


Strange aroma methinks.
 
jerry12953 said:
=

It looks to me that if you wanted to (and that is important) you could take this a long way up the police complaints procedure. But you will need more than advice, you would need solicitors to act on your behalf. .
Click to expand...

I have handled a similar issue ( not photography related but a wrongful arrest and defamation case) wihtout the need for a solicitor. The complaints procedure is very simple via the ipcc . It was in no way intimidating and all taken very serious. In the end i ended up with a direct apology from the officer in question ( actually worth more than anything else), and a small compensation without the need and hassle for court. It was suggested the officer in questions was going to have serious disciplinary procedures against them but i requested this did not happen as i dont want anyone losing there job just so long as they learn from the situation.
 
Bernie174 said:
So do I, hence my question.
In order for that to happen, it would take a lot of people to suddenly decide to chuck the book out the window, and risk their jobs. In this day and age, unlikely.
As for the deletion? The OP says he wasn't forced to, he felt pressured too, and thats a subjective state of mind.
Personally, before leaping aboard the outrage bus, which is the default position for some, I'd want to know a whole lot more.
So, as the OP has the stop slip, and that as I recall has a box for arrest yes/no, perhaps he'd like to paste a scan on here, with the personal info blanked out, obviously. Maybe then we will get a bit more towards the bottom of it.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Seems odd to me as well.

Do as Bernie says, and I'll call up a couple of mates who work for the local press. If you PM me your contact details, they'll talk to you and you can give your side of the story. In the meantime, shall I call the local police station in my capacity as a journalist and see what they have to say? You do have the names of the officers involved, I imagine. Also, I presume there were plenty of witnesses to this? The will be a load of cctv around there, so the full story can very easily be verified.

Or, just perhaps, you are going to drop the whole thing as you don't want to make a fuss...

What day did you say this happened? And about what time?
 
asphotographymk said:
I have handled a similar issue ( not photography related but a wrongful arrest and defamation case) wihtout the need for a solicitor. The complaints procedure is very simple via the ipcc . It was in no way intimidating and all taken very serious. In the end i ended up with a direct apology from the officer in question ( actually worth more than anything else), and a small compensation without the need and hassle for court. It was suggested the officer in questions was going to have serious disciplinary procedures against them but i requested this did not happen as i dont want anyone losing there job just so long as they learn from the situation.
Click to expand...

I suggest hoogle would need legal advice on whether to take the diy route or not. He may be confident about it, but from the original post he seemed more bewildered than anything else. It would be an option.

It's little practical use arguing about it on a photographers forum though. It's a legal isssue.
 
Last edited:
jerry12953 said:
I suggest hoogle would need legal advice on whether to take the diy route or not. He may be confident about it, but from the original post he seemed more bewildered than anything else. It would be an option.

It's little practical use arguing about it on a photographers forum though. It's a legal isssue.
Click to expand...

he did discuss his age as being young. If it's the first contact with the police then it's easy to be 'persuaded' that someone with authority knows what they are saying.
 
I've taken pictures in lots of places that maybe I shouldn't have, and of Police Officers, PCSO's even America, Portugese Spanish and French Police Officers ( and we know how belligerent the French ones can be) and have never had a second look.
It makes me wonder how these people, who are arrested / detained / warned off, are acting to arouse suspicion.
But, on a lighter note, I would pay the £75 waiver and spend every hour possible with my camera taking photos of everything and everybody, with my waiver notice pinned to my chest. :naughty:

And on to dispel a myth or two. RIPA or the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 is not relevant in these circumstances. RIPA is used in entirely different situations. A quick read of the act itself will clarify any misconceptions.
If you are being searched under the Terrorism Act then that act gives the Police power to view images taken on a camera or phone, but not to delete them. If you are a Journalist, then they may not even view your images without a court order as the images acquired or created for the purposes of journalism may constitute journalistic material.

Allan
 
I hope that the OP manages to get something sorted that he will be happy with, as to whether he'll come back on here to post his "reciept" or not remains to be seen I guess given some of the comments calling his account into question :shrug:
 
Bernie174 said:
So do I, hence my question.
In order for that to happen, it would take a lot of people to suddenly decide to chuck the book out the window, and risk their jobs. In this day and age, unlikely.
As for the deletion? The OP says he wasn't forced to, he felt pressured too, and thats a subjective state of mind.
Personally, before leaping aboard the outrage bus, which is the default position for some, I'd want to know a whole lot more.
So, as the OP has the stop slip, and that as I recall has a box for arrest yes/no, perhaps he'd like to paste a scan on here, with the personal info blanked out, obviously. Maybe then we will get a bit more towards the bottom of it.
Click to expand...

In the cold light of day,their does seem something odd about all this,i think the OP,need to fill us in some more.
 
Can I make a couple of points :- you do not need a solicitor to make a complaint about the police. If you go on to the Thames Valley police website it is clearly explained how to do so. It is a straight forward process and I would suggest that in the circumstances given, you attend Milton Keynes police station and ask to speak to the duty Inspector. He is obliged to take your complaint and forward it to the Professional Standards Directorate. I would suggest that this is a matter unlikely to be dealt with by the IPCC. All Inspectors are trained in how to take complaints. I would advise if you are under 18 to take an adult.

I would advise you against posting the stop / search form here.

As has been previously advised, no police officer can delete your images and there are only very specific instances whereby they can view them. ( this has been posted numerous times on this forum and I won't go into it again) Any officer can ask to view the images but you are quite within your rights to refuse, if you wish. I am not going to bore you with regards to trespass but the information previously posted appears to be correct. If told to stop on private land you must stop. But again, this is a civil matter and not an offence for which you can be arrested. However, reasonable force can be used to get you to leave the land.

The last point I will make is that Milton Keynes custody area is extremely large and I have no doubt if anyone had been taken into it, they would recognise it as such.
 
Handy pullout in the current Digital Camera magazine on this issue.

Sorry to hear about your experience. I would like to think this kind of behavior is the exception rather than the rule.
 
norters said:
Handy pullout in the current Digital Camera magazine on this issue.

Sorry to hear about your experience. I would like to think this kind of behavior is the exception rather than the rule.
Click to expand...


Happens a lot!
 
One more point. There is an official letter from the met commissioner on the subject of photography laws and rules. I'm on ky phone now so can't link it but I'm sure somebody will. Maybe be worth it to the OP to print a copy to have to quote should this in fact go any further.
 
norters said:
Handy pullout in the current Digital Camera magazine on this issue.

Sorry to hear about your experience. I would like to think this kind of behavior is the exception rather than the rule.
Click to expand...

EOS_JD said:
Happens a lot!
Click to expand...

neil_g said:
getting taken to a police station and detained with apparently no arrest, being taken to the station and being made to delete files by intimidation?

first time ive heard of it and it still sounds odd to me. more info required by the OP in my opinion.
Click to expand...

ernesto said:
Have you got a link to the source of the data to prove that?
Click to expand...

Wot ernesto et al said.

Hardly ever happens in my experience. And I don't remember a single instance of anyone contacting any of the various newspapers I've worked on over the years with one of these stories.

So, I'm calling BS on this. Prove me wrong.
 
neil_g said:
getting taken to a police station and detained with apparently no arrest, being taken to the station and being made to delete files by intimidation?

first time ive heard of it and it still sounds odd to me. more info required by the OP in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I over exagerated a little - hapens often is maybe a better one to use! - People are stopped often and asked to delete images by security guards and Police (I have been - although politely explained the law to them) - Perhaps people are not arrested but they are often asked a few questions and more often asked to delete (which they have no rights to do)..

Actually hapened to a high profile reporter who was detained a while back and brought out a comment from the MET.

Do a google search for "photographer detained by police" and there's a few interesting stories. There are regular posts here too from members who have been approached by security and police.
 
The letter you're thinking of was issued by Chief Constable Andy Trotter. Google will find you plenty of sources.
 
EOS_JD said:
Perhaps I over exagerated a little - hapens often is maybe a better one to use! - People are stopped often and asked to delete images by security guards and Police (I have been - although politely explained the law to them) - Perhaps people are not arrested but they are often asked a few questions and more often asked to delete (which they have no rights to do)..
.
Click to expand...

strictly speaking theres nothing preventing them from asking you to delete images - but equally there's nothing stopping you from refusing. They can't force you to do it or do it themselves

its quite rare for a photographer to be arrested , but its much rarer (indeed virtually unknown) for a photographer to be detained without arrest or charge and denied their PACE rights, were that element of the story to prove true it would be a much more serious breach than someone feeling pressured to delete his photos.

However i'm with Jon on the serious unlikelyhood of a bunch of cops suddenly deciding to throw pace out of the window, just to detain a photographer.
 
I'm reading this on my mobile, which is not the easiest way of taking all this information in. Shocking treatment and I agree with the majority of comments on here. If I have understood you correctly, you are applying or have applied to join the Police Service.

There are two ways to go here if you write to the Chief Constable of TVPOL he may refer it to professional standards for investigation, or the local area Supt in which case it may be handed down the chain,

If I was in your position I would be concerned that your details (name, dob, address etc) would have been recorded on their intelligence database. This could impact on your application. If you get through the selection / interview process then the UK Vetting Agencey are likely to be made aware of this incident via local checks, I.e via the LIO (Local intelligence Officer) or team.

I would try to arrange an informal chat ( face to face) with TVPOL Professional Standards to discuss your concerns.

Good luck, Nick
 
Last edited:
asphotographymk said:
I have handled a similar issue ( not photography related but a wrongful arrest and defamation case) wihtout the need for a solicitor. The complaints procedure is very simple via the ipcc . It was in no way intimidating and all taken very serious. In the end i ended up with a direct apology from the officer in question ( actually worth more than anything else), and a small compensation without the need and hassle for court. It was suggested the officer in questions was going to have serious disciplinary procedures against them but i requested this did not happen as i dont want anyone losing there job just so long as they learn from the situation.
Click to expand...

Best thing i have read on here for a while. Bollicking deserved , but not wanting anyone to lose thier job! :LOL::LOL:
 
asphotographymk said:
I have handled a similar issue ( not photography related but a wrongful arrest and defamation case) wihtout the need for a solicitor. The complaints procedure is very simple via the ipcc . It was in no way intimidating and all taken very serious. In the end i ended up with a direct apology from the officer in question ( actually worth more than anything else), and a small compensation without the need and hassle for court. It was suggested the officer in questions was going to have serious disciplinary procedures against them but i requested this did not happen as i dont want anyone losing there job just so long as they learn from the situation.
Click to expand...

Take note Andrew........;).............., I agree with you and well done..............:clap:
 
learning the law or knowing the law will get you nowhere with the police apart from being told your talking back to them, being "lippy"", police officers these days are far too agressive. as soon as someone says anything back to them even if it is a gentle reminder, your in the van for public disorder.

i would like to see an outcome to this on here please.
 
Last edited:
Am I the only one thinking this thread is just one massive wind up?

The legal inconsistencies and improbabilities being the key reasons...
 
Nope - although MK have been known to be rather anti photography in the past, so there's a ring of truth to it.
 
DemiLion said:
Nope - although MK have been known to be rather anti photography in the past, so there's a ring of truth to it.
Click to expand...

Only if the force involved were from another planet.

I think the op should explain a few inconstancies here. Such as; if he was detained and taken to a 'holding area' he would have been arrested. Otherwise in short the police wouldn't continue his detention and take him to the station. Therefore he would have been specifically informed of the precise offence he is suspected of committing and the reasons for the arrest. There is no such offence as "suspicious activity" as stated by the OP. He would then be booked into custody by the custody sgt with the full circumstances and suspected offence being very clearly explained to the custody sgt in front of the detainee who has to be 100% sure of the legality of the arrest before he can then authorise the continued detention at the police station, and that the reasons for the arrest are justified.

And professional police officers would have no reason to attend this on blue lights - why would they? Hardly a risk to life and limb, and no way would this have been classed as an immediate grade 1 response.

Finally, the only things that will appear on a criminal record are cautions and convictions. A simple "warning" at the police station will not appear on any criminal record.

As sad as it sounds, this reads to me as someone who has read a few stories and has cobbled something together for a bit of attention.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
As sad as it sounds, this reads to me as someone who has read a few stories and has cobbled something together for a bit of attention.
Click to expand...

There's a worrying trend starting on this forum these days. We are supposed to be the friendliest forum, yet again members have launched into a full internet trial of this person and found him guilty.

I've taken from his posts that he is a young, inexperienced photographer. Reading some of these posts, would you return to respond?

I'd personally like the law to treat me as innocent until proven guilty and I'd hope the same would apply with my peers.

May I remind some memberto to read the forum guidelines, especially conduct towards other members: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=27659
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure about an 'Internet trial' but there are certainly some strange inconsistencies, 'blue lights', 'detained' but not arrested, 'got a solicitor' after the advice here ... yet well into the evening.
May be true but I think it's quite reasonable to be sceptical of this tale as there are a number of issues that just don't add up.
 
Byker
No ones found him guilty, although some have found the Police guilty so far. The same rules apply to them as it does to the OP.
What some of us are doing, who have some experience and knowledge is querying some of what he said.
There are very good reasons for that, it must be just as unacceptable to come on here and mislead people as it is to come on here and be abusive.
There is a system in place and has been for a very long time which Police have no option but to use when arresting people (there is no such thing as detaining except while stopping and what he has described as arrest). To circumvent that system, not only requires the co operation of a lot of people, but risks everyone of those peoples job and livelihood. Knowing what Police officers are like nowadays, that is not going to happen.
I don't doubt he was stopped, but the rest? No, I am seriously concerned about.
It is therefore right that instead of drinking in every word as fact, this is looked at a bit more closely before leaping on the outrage bus. I accept for some it suits them to believe what they are told, as it 'proves' their own prejudice, but I'd like to hope that most are not that gullible.
The answers to a few of the points that have been made by those of us with experience, rather than assumptions, would go some way to establish whether whats been said is in fact all true, partly true, or an attempt to paint police as in the wrong for other reasons.
 
That the OP seems to have vanished speaks rather eloquently. If this had happened, I would have expected him to be yelling and shouting at people doubting his word - and justifiably.

However...

:shrug:
 
Byker28i said:
There's a worrying trend starting on this forum these days. We are supposed to be the friendliest forum, yet again members have launched into a full internet trial of this person and found him guilty.

I've taken from his posts that he is a young, inexperienced photographer. Reading some of these posts, would you return to respond?

I'd personally like the law to treat me as innocent until proven guilty and I'd hope the same would apply with my peers.

May I remind some memberto to read the forum guidelines, especially conduct towards other members: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=27659
Click to expand...

Maybe you could explain exactly what rules I have breached? I've only pointed out the glaring legal errors and procedural impossibilities described by the op then fully explained and reasoned *why* with the facts, then expressed my opinion as to why he may have posted this.

I've not been aggressive or abusive, and my post was civil, I simply just questioned his motivations.

I'm more than happy to be proved wrong by the OP if he has not correctly expressed certain terms and events.
 
Last edited:
After that very famous thread on another forum where a well established member went into a hell of a lot of work to make it look like he'd been stabbed, pictures, false police reports and all, only to be found out it was all faked and later admitting it, I dont believe anything anyone posts until they back it up with hard eveidence and reasoned responses.

If this story is true, I could quite understand that in the heat of the moment, some of the facts may have been skewed slightly, and the recollections may not be 100% accurate, but simply all the OP has to do is come back and clear up the very reasonable questions asked by people who have direct experience with this sort of thing. The OP asked for people to explain the law, which they have done, but the OP has not returned to take on the advice or to answer the questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top